Allowed

Chhituram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2024BAIL/108/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed the bail application of the applicant, Chhituram, charged with forgery and cheating. The court considered the applicant's lack of prior record, the long period of incarceration, and the absence of flight risk before imposing standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and undertaking not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.

Chhituram vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45310

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 108 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Chhituram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Counter Affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for respondent State.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that statement of Sangeeta Yadav, Principal of Adarsh Montessori School, Ramganj, District Raebareli falsifies the entire prosecution case. According to her statement the records of the attendance register from 1984-2000 has been destroyed and other records of transfer certificate are also missing, therefore, in absence of the original record it is wrong to allege that any forgery has been committed by the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 25.1.2023.

¶9

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that charge-sheet has been filed, the offences are triable by Magistrate and the period of incarceration of the applicant, he has no criminal history and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am prima facie

¶12

satisfied that it is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail and accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant Chhituram, involved in Case Crime No.29 of 2023 under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Gauriganj, District Amethi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is

¶20

issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

Order Date :- 3.7.2024

¶22

Madhu

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Chhituram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhituram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sonu Kumar Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Kuldeep Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Ishityaqk @ Manne Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Mohd. Sohel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko.

Ramveer Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko.